Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere but I couldn't find it,

Firstly, when the goal umpire stands up against the post and it hits the goal umpire, the ball is deemed to have hit the post.

Can someone explain why when the ball hit the Coll players leg that was up against the goal post why it was deemed 'play on' with the subsequent goal to the Pies?

Surely this should have been a point??

And while I am on it the video referee is stuffed, They simply have not got it right and we have been on the receiving end numerous times now. In the Ess game with Nicholson's goal when it wasn't referred (and clearly should have been - and awarded a goal!) and against the Filth a week later (when they belatedly referred it - after the ball was returned to the centre square - and then made IMO an incorrect decision).

Typical AFL knee-jerk rule implementation without consideration for variables that occur. And poor education of players and umps in how the rule works. It was the same with the rushed behind rule brought in a few years ago after the Hawks won the GF. Players still don't understand it!

Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere but I couldn't find it,

Firstly, when the goal umpire stands up against the post and it hits the goal umpire, the ball is deemed to have hit the post.

Can someone explain why when the ball hit the Coll players leg that was up against the goal post why it was deemed 'play on' with the subsequent goal to the Pies?

Surely this should have been a point??

I'm surprised you can't see the difference.

Its the umpire - he's not part of the game and can't 'prevent' a score, wheras a player is entitled to handle a ball and the position of the ball is all that counts, not the players position

e.g. player can be behind the boundary line and play a ball inside the boundary, same with a mark where player standing behind the goal line and ball not crossed the goal line

I'm surprised you can't see the difference.

Its the umpire - he's not part of the game and can't 'prevent' a score, wheras a player is entitled to handle a ball and the position of the ball is all that counts, not the players position

e.g. player can be behind the boundary line and play a ball inside the boundary, same with a mark where player standing behind the goal line and ball not crossed the goal line

Right. For all intents and purposes, an umpire doesn't exist. Although I do find it a little bit inconsistent that when the ball is marked by the umpire, it's a ball up, but when it bounces off the umpire standing against the post, it's a behind.

Let's forget about the goal umpire, but I thought technically if you are touching the ball and the goal post at the same time it is ruled a point, therefore if your leg is touching the post and the ball hits your leg its a point, but that is really nitty gritty technical stuff and I think common sense says the ball got pushed back by gold sacks leg and a goal isn't a bad result. It's hard to say it made any impact to the result.

Also the Nicholson one from the week before if reviewed must have been still awarded a point because you can't definitively say it was a goal so the goal umpires decision would have stood.